==9.2.12 Judges of the Scottish Court of Session bearing a law title beginning with Lord==

==9.2.12 Judges of the Scottish Court of Session bearing a law title beginning with Lord==

+

+

Just a question here. Just how would we be able to determine whether the person is Scottish or not? Knop for Fieg, ATLA, 2/10/08

+

+

This is yet another example of why we need general instructions in chapter 0 on what to do when you don't know whether a particular instruction applies. Weiss 2/18/08

===9.2.12.1===

===9.2.12.1===

Line 43:

Line 47:

===9.2.13.1===

===9.2.13.1===

+

In the fourth example, how many primary access points will be valid? This could be very interesting, to say the least. Knop for Fieg, ATLA, 2/10/08

==9.2.14 General guidelines on recording names containing neither a surname nor a title of nobility==

==9.2.14 General guidelines on recording names containing neither a surname nor a title of nobility==

Line 53:

Line 58:

====9.2.14.1.3====

====9.2.14.1.3====

+

+

I support the deletion of the comma. Weiss 2/10/08

====9.2.14.1.4====

====9.2.14.1.4====

“Treat a roman numeral associated with a given name … as an integral part of the name (Elizabeth II).” This speaks to an encoding system that uses single complete string headings. It gives no useful guidance to anyone with a non-traditional system that parses names into separate bits. de Groat for NRMIG 2/8/2008

“Treat a roman numeral associated with a given name … as an integral part of the name (Elizabeth II).” This speaks to an encoding system that uses single complete string headings. It gives no useful guidance to anyone with a non-traditional system that parses names into separate bits. de Groat for NRMIG 2/8/2008

+

+

Agree. Weiss 2/18/08

====9.2.14.1.5====

====9.2.14.1.5====

+

This instruction is a bit vague. I know your are dealing with titled people here, but without context, it could be taken as a general rule. You might include “titled persons” or something like it in this instruction. Knop for Fieg, ATLA, 2/10/08

+

+

Isn't this dealing with people who DON'T have a title? Randall 2/18/08

====9.2.14.1.6====

====9.2.14.1.6====

Line 66:

Line 78:

I realize this is basically the AACR2 rule, but it is too broad. According to OED, a patronymic is "a name derived from that of a father or male ancestor, esp. by addition of an affix indicating such descent" "MacDonald," "Peterson", and "Swensen" are all patronymics, whether the bearer's father's name is Donald, Peter, or Swen, or not (to be a patronymic it just has to derive from a male ancestor). I have Swedish ancestors who used such names *as patronymics* as recently as the late 19th century. My ancestor Jons Olsson (1822-1863) was so named because his father's name was Ola. After that his descendants used the name "Olsen" or "Olsson," so the strict patronymic usage ended. But under 9.2.15 I suppose I should establish him as "Jons Olsson" and not "Olsson, Jons." This seems quite odd and probably not what was intended. But I am certain the rule didn't intend Jesse Jackson to be established in direct order, even though his name consists of "one or more given names and a patronymic". A clearer definition of what is meant by patronymic and what names this rule is intended to apply to is perhaps needed. Bob Maxwell, Jan. 1, 2008.

I realize this is basically the AACR2 rule, but it is too broad. According to OED, a patronymic is "a name derived from that of a father or male ancestor, esp. by addition of an affix indicating such descent" "MacDonald," "Peterson", and "Swensen" are all patronymics, whether the bearer's father's name is Donald, Peter, or Swen, or not (to be a patronymic it just has to derive from a male ancestor). I have Swedish ancestors who used such names *as patronymics* as recently as the late 19th century. My ancestor Jons Olsson (1822-1863) was so named because his father's name was Ola. After that his descendants used the name "Olsen" or "Olsson," so the strict patronymic usage ended. But under 9.2.15 I suppose I should establish him as "Jons Olsson" and not "Olsson, Jons." This seems quite odd and probably not what was intended. But I am certain the rule didn't intend Jesse Jackson to be established in direct order, even though his name consists of "one or more given names and a patronymic". A clearer definition of what is meant by patronymic and what names this rule is intended to apply to is perhaps needed. Bob Maxwell, Jan. 1, 2008.

+

Agree; if the term is kept, define it, since it has multiple meanings in normal usage. Weiss 2/18/08

+

+

Agree that the usage in the rule should be very clearly defined, so the instructions are applied appropriately. Randall 2/18/08

+

I think the intention is that the rule applies to names that are currently used as patronymics, not to names derived from patronymics that are now surnames. Jesse Jackson does not have a patronymic, he has a surname. On the other hand, if Jons Olsson was so named because his father was Ola, he should indeed be established as "Jons Olsson." One also has to keep in mind that this rule comes under the general heading "Recording names containing neither a surname nor a title of nobility" above 9.2.14. This keeps the rule from applying to Russian names, which as I understand it can contain both a patronymic and a surname. Hopefully the online product will display the hierarchy of headings so that one knows the full context of the rule.--J. Hostage, 1/25/2008

I think the intention is that the rule applies to names that are currently used as patronymics, not to names derived from patronymics that are now surnames. Jesse Jackson does not have a patronymic, he has a surname. On the other hand, if Jons Olsson was so named because his father was Ola, he should indeed be established as "Jons Olsson." One also has to keep in mind that this rule comes under the general heading "Recording names containing neither a surname nor a title of nobility" above 9.2.14. This keeps the rule from applying to Russian names, which as I understand it can contain both a patronymic and a surname. Hopefully the online product will display the hierarchy of headings so that one knows the full context of the rule.--J. Hostage, 1/25/2008

+

+

It is possible for a name (e.g. Jackson) to be both a surname and a patronymic (see OED definition). Maxwell 2/18/08

===9.2.15.1===

===9.2.15.1===

===9.2.15.2===

===9.2.15.2===

+

“If the name by which a royal person is known includes the name of a royal house, dynasty … record the name in direct order. (Eleanor, of Aquitaine)” This speaks to an encoding system that uses single complete string headings. It gives no useful guidance to anyone with a non-traditional system that parses names into separate bits. de Groat for NRMIG 2/8/2008

===9.2.15.3===

===9.2.15.3===

Line 91:

Line 110:

====9.2.17.1.2====

====9.2.17.1.2====

+

Examples: How does A!A!A! differ from J** W****? Both are single letter abbreviations, but the symbols are omitted in one case and not in the other. Knop,ATLA,2/9/08

==9.2.18 General guidelines on recording names consisting of a phrase==

==9.2.18 General guidelines on recording names consisting of a phrase==

Line 100:

Line 122:

====9.2.18.1.2====

====9.2.18.1.2====

Why is the rule for Dr. X different from the rule for Dr. Suess (9.2.5.4.1) or Malcolm X (9.2.5.3.1)? Why is the rule for Mother Hen different than the rule for Aunt Jemima (9.2.19.2)? These distinctions can cause confusion. KINCY, MedLA Liaison on behalf of NLM, 2/08/2008

Why is the rule for Dr. X different from the rule for Dr. Suess (9.2.5.4.1) or Malcolm X (9.2.5.3.1)? Why is the rule for Mother Hen different than the rule for Aunt Jemima (9.2.19.2)? These distinctions can cause confusion. KINCY, MedLA Liaison on behalf of NLM, 2/08/2008

+

+

Agree. Weiss 2/18/08

+

+

Problem: This seems very arbitrary. Why is Dr. X different from either Seuss, Dr. or X, Malcolm?

+

Solution: Is it a bad example? Or a bad rule? I don't know, sorry. -Theroux for D. Brooking, ACRL/SEES/Automated Bibliographic Control Committee, 2/9/08

+

+

It's a bad example. This rule is for phrase headings, not "real" names. I suppose "Dr. X" is considered a phrase because it neither has a forename nor a surname (unlike "Malcolm X" and "Dr. Suess") but I agree the example is needlessly confusing unless it is explained. Maxwell 2/18/08

====9.2.18.1.3====

====9.2.18.1.3====

Line 112:

Line 141:

===9.2.19.2===

===9.2.19.2===

+

+

This violates the principle of Common usage or practice. Make this parallel with 9.2.18.1.2: switch this with the relevant part 9.3.7, so that "Aunt Jemima" is the preferred form, and "Jemima, Aunt" is the variant form. Weiss 2/10/08

+

+

Agree. Randall 2/18/08

===9.2.19.3===

===9.2.19.3===

Line 120:

Line 153:

===9.2.20.2===

===9.2.20.2===

+

“Record the phrase in direct order (Pseduo-Brutus)” This speaks to an encoding system that uses single complete string headings. It gives no useful guidance to anyone with a non-traditional system that parses names into separate bits. de Groat for NRMIG 2/8/2008

+

+

I have dealt with these kind of entries before. I was told by a NACO liaison or LC that the “Pseudo” names had to be attributed to a body of work; the “pseudo” cannot be used simply because you do not know the name. Add to you instruction—or emphasize it, at least—that such a “Pseudo” person has be verified in reference sources. Knop for Fieg, ATLA, 2/10/08

+

+

Disagree; do not continue LCRI practice. Weiss 2/18/08

+

+

Agree with Weiss. Maxwell 2/18/08

==9.2.21 Characterizing word or phrase==

==9.2.21 Characterizing word or phrase==

NLM proposes these rules be removed. Creating these names are not helpful to the user and do not fulfill the objectives stated in 8.2.1. KINCY, MedLA Liaison on behalf of NLM 2/08/2008

NLM proposes these rules be removed. Creating these names are not helpful to the user and do not fulfill the objectives stated in 8.2.1. KINCY, MedLA Liaison on behalf of NLM 2/08/2008

+

+

Strongly disagree; some name is better than no name. Weiss 2/18/08

+

+

Agree with Weiss. Maxwell 2/18/08

+

+

It would be interesting to know if there are any empirical data on usage (e.g., citation, use as search terms, etc.; not use by catalogers...) Randall 2/18/08

===9.2.21.1===

===9.2.21.1===

Line 129:

Line 175:

The JSC should also consider retaining initial articles on surnames. Arabic and Persian sources listing names by surname will retain the article while filing on the letter following the article. Members of the Arabic NACO Funnel from Egypt have questioned the practice of removing it. It would improve internationalization and the technology is available to permit it. Initial articles on surnames should be retained, although not filed on. Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA Feb. 4, 2008

The JSC should also consider retaining initial articles on surnames. Arabic and Persian sources listing names by surname will retain the article while filing on the letter following the article. Members of the Arabic NACO Funnel from Egypt have questioned the practice of removing it. It would improve internationalization and the technology is available to permit it. Initial articles on surnames should be retained, although not filed on. Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA Feb. 4, 2008

+

+

Agree. Glennan 2/16/08; Maxwell 2/18/08

+

+

Strongly agree. Weiss 2/18/08

===9.2.21.3===

===9.2.21.3===

+

Third bullet. Will the appellation be attached to the real name? I don’t think it will be, but you might want to make that clear. Use this type of name in your instructions on constructing a variant personal name. Knop for Fieg, ATLA, 2/10/08

==9.2.22 Phrase naming another work by the person==

==9.2.22 Phrase naming another work by the person==

NLM proposes these rules be removed. Creating these names are not helpful to the user and do not fulfill the objectives stated in 8.2.1. KINCY, MedLA Liaison on behalf of NLM 2/08/2008

NLM proposes these rules be removed. Creating these names are not helpful to the user and do not fulfill the objectives stated in 8.2.1. KINCY, MedLA Liaison on behalf of NLM 2/08/2008

+

+

Strongly disagree; some name is better than no name. Weiss 2/18/08

+

+

Agree with Weiss. Maxwell 2/18/08

+

+

It would be interesting to know if there are any empirical data on usage (e.g., citation, use as search terms, etc.; not use by catalogers...) Randall 2/18/08

===9.2.22.1===

===9.2.22.1===

Line 140:

Line 197:

The JSC should also consider retaining initial articles on surnames. Arabic and Persian sources listing names by surname will retain the article while filing on the letter following the article. Members of the Arabic NACO Funnel from Egypt have questioned the practice of removing it. It would improve internationalization and the technology is available to permit it. Initial articles on surnames should be retained, although not filed on. Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA Feb. 4, 2008

The JSC should also consider retaining initial articles on surnames. Arabic and Persian sources listing names by surname will retain the article while filing on the letter following the article. Members of the Arabic NACO Funnel from Egypt have questioned the practice of removing it. It would improve internationalization and the technology is available to permit it. Initial articles on surnames should be retained, although not filed on. Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA Feb. 4, 2008

+

+

I see that one of these names is already in the Name Authority File (NAF). By the way, get rid of the word “another” in the section title; it reads now as if you know the real name of the person. AACR2 22.11D reads much more clearly; use its language. Knop for Fieg, ATLA, 2/10/08

===9.2.22.3===

===9.2.22.3===

===9.2.22.4===

===9.2.22.4===

Latest revision as of 20:11, 18 February 2008

To enter your comments, click on the link where you want to comment.
Always log in before editing a section.

9.2.11 Titles in the United Kingdom peerage that include a territorial designation

9.2.11.1

9.2.11.2

9.2.11.3

9.2.12 Judges of the Scottish Court of Session bearing a law title beginning with Lord

Just a question here. Just how would we be able to determine whether the person is Scottish or not? Knop for Fieg, ATLA, 2/10/08

This is yet another example of why we need general instructions in chapter 0 on what to do when you don't know whether a particular instruction applies. Weiss 2/18/08

9.2.12.1

9.2.13 Disclaimed and newly acquired titles

9.2.13.1

In the fourth example, how many primary access points will be valid? This could be very interesting, to say the least. Knop for Fieg, ATLA, 2/10/08

9.2.14 General guidelines on recording names containing neither a surname nor a title of nobility

9.2.14.1 General guidelines

9.2.14.1.1

9.2.14.1.2

9.2.14.1.3

I support the deletion of the comma. Weiss 2/10/08

9.2.14.1.4

“Treat a roman numeral associated with a given name … as an integral part of the name (Elizabeth II).” This speaks to an encoding system that uses single complete string headings. It gives no useful guidance to anyone with a non-traditional system that parses names into separate bits. de Groat for NRMIG 2/8/2008

Agree. Weiss 2/18/08

9.2.14.1.5

This instruction is a bit vague. I know your are dealing with titled people here, but without context, it could be taken as a general rule. You might include “titled persons” or something like it in this instruction. Knop for Fieg, ATLA, 2/10/08

Isn't this dealing with people who DON'T have a title? Randall 2/18/08

9.2.14.1.6

9.2.15 Names including a patronymic

I realize this is basically the AACR2 rule, but it is too broad. According to OED, a patronymic is "a name derived from that of a father or male ancestor, esp. by addition of an affix indicating such descent" "MacDonald," "Peterson", and "Swensen" are all patronymics, whether the bearer's father's name is Donald, Peter, or Swen, or not (to be a patronymic it just has to derive from a male ancestor). I have Swedish ancestors who used such names *as patronymics* as recently as the late 19th century. My ancestor Jons Olsson (1822-1863) was so named because his father's name was Ola. After that his descendants used the name "Olsen" or "Olsson," so the strict patronymic usage ended. But under 9.2.15 I suppose I should establish him as "Jons Olsson" and not "Olsson, Jons." This seems quite odd and probably not what was intended. But I am certain the rule didn't intend Jesse Jackson to be established in direct order, even though his name consists of "one or more given names and a patronymic". A clearer definition of what is meant by patronymic and what names this rule is intended to apply to is perhaps needed. Bob Maxwell, Jan. 1, 2008.

Agree; if the term is kept, define it, since it has multiple meanings in normal usage. Weiss 2/18/08

Agree that the usage in the rule should be very clearly defined, so the instructions are applied appropriately. Randall 2/18/08

I think the intention is that the rule applies to names that are currently used as patronymics, not to names derived from patronymics that are now surnames. Jesse Jackson does not have a patronymic, he has a surname. On the other hand, if Jons Olsson was so named because his father was Ola, he should indeed be established as "Jons Olsson." One also has to keep in mind that this rule comes under the general heading "Recording names containing neither a surname nor a title of nobility" above 9.2.14. This keeps the rule from applying to Russian names, which as I understand it can contain both a patronymic and a surname. Hopefully the online product will display the hierarchy of headings so that one knows the full context of the rule.--J. Hostage, 1/25/2008

It is possible for a name (e.g. Jackson) to be both a surname and a patronymic (see OED definition). Maxwell 2/18/08

9.2.15.1

9.2.15.2

“If the name by which a royal person is known includes the name of a royal house, dynasty … record the name in direct order. (Eleanor, of Aquitaine)” This speaks to an encoding system that uses single complete string headings. It gives no useful guidance to anyone with a non-traditional system that parses names into separate bits. de Groat for NRMIG 2/8/2008

9.2.15.3

Appendix F.7 on Malay names includes a section on "Filial indicators" (F.7.1.3). One of the filial indicators is "bin," son of, effectively a patronymic like the Arabic "ibn." Add: See Appendix F.7.1.3 for additional instructions on filial indicators contained in names in Malay. Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA Feb. 4, 2008

9.2.15.4

9.2.16 Names of royal persons

9.2.16.1

9.2.16.2

9.2.17 General guidelines of recording names consisting of initials, or separate letteres or numerals

9.2.17.1 General guidelines

9.2.17.1.1

9.2.17.1.2

Examples: How does A!A!A! differ from J** W****? Both are single letter abbreviations, but the symbols are omitted in one case and not in the other. Knop,ATLA,2/9/08

9.2.18 General guidelines on recording names consisting of a phrase

9.2.18.1 General guidelines

9.2.18.1.1

9.2.18.1.2

Why is the rule for Dr. X different from the rule for Dr. Suess (9.2.5.4.1) or Malcolm X (9.2.5.3.1)? Why is the rule for Mother Hen different than the rule for Aunt Jemima (9.2.19.2)? These distinctions can cause confusion. KINCY, MedLA Liaison on behalf of NLM, 2/08/2008

Agree. Weiss 2/18/08

Problem: This seems very arbitrary. Why is Dr. X different from either Seuss, Dr. or X, Malcolm?
Solution: Is it a bad example? Or a bad rule? I don't know, sorry. -Theroux for D. Brooking, ACRL/SEES/Automated Bibliographic Control Committee, 2/9/08

It's a bad example. This rule is for phrase headings, not "real" names. I suppose "Dr. X" is considered a phrase because it neither has a forename nor a surname (unlike "Malcolm X" and "Dr. Suess") but I agree the example is needlessly confusing unless it is explained. Maxwell 2/18/08

9.2.18.1.3

9.2.18.1.4

9.2.18.1.5

9.2.19 Phrase consisting of a forename or forenames preceded by a term of address, etc.

9.2.19.1

9.2.19.2

This violates the principle of Common usage or practice. Make this parallel with 9.2.18.1.2: switch this with the relevant part 9.3.7, so that "Aunt Jemima" is the preferred form, and "Jemima, Aunt" is the variant form. Weiss 2/10/08

Agree. Randall 2/18/08

9.2.19.3

9.2.20 Phrase containing the name of another person

9.2.20.1

9.2.20.2

“Record the phrase in direct order (Pseduo-Brutus)” This speaks to an encoding system that uses single complete string headings. It gives no useful guidance to anyone with a non-traditional system that parses names into separate bits. de Groat for NRMIG 2/8/2008

I have dealt with these kind of entries before. I was told by a NACO liaison or LC that the “Pseudo” names had to be attributed to a body of work; the “pseudo” cannot be used simply because you do not know the name. Add to you instruction—or emphasize it, at least—that such a “Pseudo” person has be verified in reference sources. Knop for Fieg, ATLA, 2/10/08

Disagree; do not continue LCRI practice. Weiss 2/18/08

Agree with Weiss. Maxwell 2/18/08

9.2.21 Characterizing word or phrase

NLM proposes these rules be removed. Creating these names are not helpful to the user and do not fulfill the objectives stated in 8.2.1. KINCY, MedLA Liaison on behalf of NLM 2/08/2008

Strongly disagree; some name is better than no name. Weiss 2/18/08

Agree with Weiss. Maxwell 2/18/08

It would be interesting to know if there are any empirical data on usage (e.g., citation, use as search terms, etc.; not use by catalogers...) Randall 2/18/08

9.2.21.1

9.2.21.2

The JSC should also consider retaining initial articles on surnames. Arabic and Persian sources listing names by surname will retain the article while filing on the letter following the article. Members of the Arabic NACO Funnel from Egypt have questioned the practice of removing it. It would improve internationalization and the technology is available to permit it. Initial articles on surnames should be retained, although not filed on. Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA Feb. 4, 2008

Agree. Glennan 2/16/08; Maxwell 2/18/08

Strongly agree. Weiss 2/18/08

9.2.21.3

Third bullet. Will the appellation be attached to the real name? I don’t think it will be, but you might want to make that clear. Use this type of name in your instructions on constructing a variant personal name. Knop for Fieg, ATLA, 2/10/08

9.2.22 Phrase naming another work by the person

NLM proposes these rules be removed. Creating these names are not helpful to the user and do not fulfill the objectives stated in 8.2.1. KINCY, MedLA Liaison on behalf of NLM 2/08/2008

Strongly disagree; some name is better than no name. Weiss 2/18/08

Agree with Weiss. Maxwell 2/18/08

It would be interesting to know if there are any empirical data on usage (e.g., citation, use as search terms, etc.; not use by catalogers...) Randall 2/18/08

9.2.22.1

9.2.22.2

The JSC should also consider retaining initial articles on surnames. Arabic and Persian sources listing names by surname will retain the article while filing on the letter following the article. Members of the Arabic NACO Funnel from Egypt have questioned the practice of removing it. It would improve internationalization and the technology is available to permit it. Initial articles on surnames should be retained, although not filed on. Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA Feb. 4, 2008

I see that one of these names is already in the Name Authority File (NAF). By the way, get rid of the word “another” in the section title; it reads now as if you know the real name of the person. AACR2 22.11D reads much more clearly; use its language. Knop for Fieg, ATLA, 2/10/08